D&D General What is player agency to you?

[soviet]

you'll note throughout the thread that of the scenario is agreed as ridiculous, no one is advocating for an absurd result.

The issue is the extreme subjectiveness of "ridiculous scenario."

Easy example:

I, and others, think that using position of privilege to secure a meeting with a noble in the City of Brass is a good use of the feature.

Whereas the "other side" thinks that this is ridiculous and deserves a flat no.

Yes. No-one is meekly accepting ridiculous or nonsensical justifications for ability use. We simply do not agree that some of the things expressed as impossible (meeting efreeti) are so.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No, not at all. People can play the game however they'd like!



But you're responsible for the fiction. You're the one that decides something you had written down ahead of time is more important than something the player decides to try during play.

And that's fine! It's a perfectly valid way to play. I mean that sincerely. But it's a choice to place your concept of the fiction above the ideas of the players.

It's not something beyond your control.



Yeah, that's fine. I don't think you're an evil cackling DM. I think you value your prep as a priority over player agency in moments where they may conflict.



Yeah, all I'm doing is pointing out that my game doesn't have these inconsistencies that folks are worried would arise from allowing the background features to always work. So my point has been that the inconsistency angle is a red herring, and so it really is about something else.

I've proposed that it's about the DM valuing their input on the game's fiction (via prep and worldbuilding) over player ideas (of the sort granted by background features, or by focusing play around the player characters). People seem to disagree with this idea... but their arguments against it seem to support it more than refute it.

Well, the way you're presenting it does read like its a negative to not do things the way you do, so some push-back is understandable I think.

 

[Micah Sweet]

@Raiztt

The poster that I quoted - @CreamCloud0 - used the phrase most reasonable.

@FrogReaver used a similar phrase upthread ("most plausible", I think).

@hawkeyefan, I, and other posters, have given examples of sufficient in-game explanations. There are endless such explanations for why the Pasha of the Efreet, or the King of Australia and his other Realms and Territories, would grant an audience to a Noble PC.

Here's another one for each: the Pasha had (or should we say received?) a dream, last night, that a mortal noble would come to the City of Brass and demand an audience. Intrigued by the dream, the Pasha now grants the audience.

MI6 have briefed the Prime Minister about possible reality rifts affecting Britain. The PM warned the King of this in his weekly briefing. The King, intrigued by the prospect of visitors from a place with less ugly urban architecture and lots of natural medicines, grants the visitors an audience.

The difference here to me is the goal. Our goal is to have anything that happens be a reasonable of the circumstances in the world, even if unlikely. Your goal seems to be making sure the rules widget works as advertised, by any necessary means.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Well, the way you're presenting it does read like its a negative to not do things the way you do, so some push-back is understandable I think.

Nope, it’s not a negative if that’s how you like to do things!

I’ve only been stating my preference and why I have that preference. And refuting claims made about my preference that I think are false.

 

[Vaalingrade]

What I do notice is that it's always GMs saying this. That is people who spend a vast majority of their time Gaming prep heavy games. I have never in 15 years on these boards seen such a post by someone who is overwhelmingly sitting on the other side of the table say it.

The DM is the Main Character of D&D you see.

"I've been doing some thinking, and I got some ideas to improve the show game. I got it right here. Uh, one: Poochie The DM needs to be louder, angrier and have access to a time machine. Two: Whenever Poochie's the DM's not on screen, all the other characters players should be asking, "Where's Poochie The DM?" Three--"

 

[Micah Sweet]

What I do notice is that it's always GMs saying this. That is people who spend a vast majority of their time Gaming prep heavy games. I have never in 15 years on these boards seen such a post by someone who is overwhelmingly sitting on the other side of the table say it.

There are far more mostly or entirely DMs on this forum than there are mostly or entirely players.

 

[Mort]

The difference here to me is the goal. Our goal is to have anything that happens be a reasonable of the circumstances in the world, even if unlikely. Your goal seems to be making sure the rules widget works as advertised, by any necessary means.

Rules widget works as advertised by any means necessary...

Really?

After countless pages of trying to explain, you're still going with "our position is the best for the game and your position is ridiculous..."

That doesn't seem either constructive or helpful.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Nope, it’s not a negative if that’s how you like to do things!

I’ve only been stating my preference and why I have that preference. And refuting claims made about my preference that I think are false.

I accept that that's your intention, but it is not consistently coming off that way. It's ok, that happens to me all the time.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Rules widget works as advertised by any means necessary...

Really?

After countless pages of trying to explain, you're still going with "our position is the best for the game and your position is ridiculous..."

That doesn't seem either constructive or helpful.

So you're saying your goal isn't to have player abilities always work, and find whatever way in the fiction is needed to achieve that goal?

 

[Mort]

So you're saying your goal isn't to have player abilities always work, and find whatever way in the fiction is needed to achieve that goal?

Our goal is to have player abilities actually be useful for the purpose they are intended.

And the point is, this whole pretzel twisting to make them fit doesn't actually happen - they fit right in with all the other gaming/roleplaying.